IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (231)

CWP-16161-2022 Date of decision:- 03.02.2026 PARVINDERJIT SINGH ... Petitioner Versus PERMANENT LOK ADALAT AND OTHERS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Ms. Mannat Anand, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Atul Bhatia, Advocate for respondent No.2.

Mr. Rajneesh Malhotra, Advocate and Ms. Manvi Verma, Advocate for respondent No.3-SBI Life.

*****

1. Without examining the dispute on merits, above-mentioned writ petition is being disposed of as Permanent Lok Adalat, Public Utility Services (for short “Lok Adalat”) has not adhered to the prescribed procedure.

2. The question to be examined is as to whether a Lok Adalat can adjudicate a lis on merits without formulating the possible terms of settlement and communicating them to the parties. This question has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Canara Bank V/s G.S. Jayarama, (2022) 7 SCC 776. Interpreting the provisions of Section 22-C of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (for short “1987 Act”), Apex Court has held that when Lok Adalat is of the opinion that a possibility of settlement exists, it shall formulate the terms of such settlement a